Kent Greenfield questions the propriety of forced patriotism:
[Fleming and McClain] use as an opening foil an op-ed I wrote in the New York Times in 2011 arguing that Constitution Day is a bad idea and “probably” unconstitutional. In that essay and in a couple of others, I have revealed Constitution Day to be a bete noire of mine. Constitution Day, as you probably know if you’re an academic, is a federal mandate dating from 2005 that any school receiving federal funds — public or private, kindergarten or law school — conduct some kind of educational program on the constitution on or about September 17 of each year. My basic argument is that it operates as a federal content-based mandate on those schools and thus amounts to coerced speech under the First Amendment. More broadly, I argue that coerced patriotism is a Bad Thing, using as my text Justice Jackson’s admonition in West Virginia v Barnette: “To believe that patriotism will not flourish if patriotic ceremonies are voluntary and spontaneous, instead of a compulsory routine, is to make an unflattering estimate of the appeal of our institutions to free minds.”
While some of us view Constitution Day as an opportunity to remind people that it protects individual rights and liberties from the government, schools tend more toward banners and platitudes about the great glory of the nation, filling the minds of innocent children with faith that government is our friend.
Sitting through a high school awards ceremony last year, I noted how many prizes and awards were handed out for various flavors of civic virtue. Whether called citizenship or patriotism, the point (together with a very directed incentive system) was to foster the belief that our government is good and their support of the government, no matter what, wins a prize.
In response, the author Fleming writes:
Greenfield poses the question, “Does our judgment of what constitutes a valid exercise of the federal government’s power to encourage civic virtue depend on the content of what is being encouraged?” Our answer is, yes, it most certainly does. As we put it, quoting the Supreme Court, government may “inculcate fundamental values necessary to the maintenance of a democratic political system.”
Values? Like critical thinking? Like understanding how to assert the rights protected? Like voting? The problem isn't that there are civic virtues worthy of being fostered, but that left in the hands of the government, the obvious fear is that they will be the values the government wants us to have: obedience, passivity toward government abuse, blind faith and "America, love it or leave it."
While many here are busy arguing about the nuts and bolts of how the interests of the government, particularly law enforcement, conflict with the rights of the people, we rarely give much thought to what those other folks are telling our children about how they should think and behave. As parents, we naturally assume that we are the most significant influence on our children's world view, and therefore waste little time thinking about what others offer. And indeed, this is probably the case.
At the same time, does the government really have a role to play in teaching our children to be good little citizens? Should they be dangling federal funding in front of school district's noses, theirs for the taking if only they throw a party for the government on command? How many public school superintendents are disinclined to embrace the whole civic virtue concept anyway? Like our civic leaders in Washington, local school bosses are very much in tune with a student body that adores and appreciates their prominence.
Is civic virtue a bad thing? That depends. Are we teaching children the good and bad, the right and wrong, the rights and responsibilities, of being an American? Are we teaching it accurately or are we instilling a religious belief that our government can do no wrong and the highest virtue is to trust and support the government no matter what?
The problem is that there are no prizes given out to students who are the best at asserting their right to counsel or their refusal to consent to a search. The Constitutional Day mandate is a government project. The compelled celebration is one of the greatness of our government and our system. It may be the same Constitution that the rest of us read, but it's tied up in the government's bow.
For those who believe that nothing short of revolution will salvage our freedoms, there's nothing about civic virtue that will bring a smile to your face. For those who believe that the concept of republicanism can only survive with a knowledgeable and informed citizenry, then civic virtue has its merit. But is it best left in the hands of government to foster its own adoration? There's the rub.
Like the other Greenfield, the notion of the government, an entity that should putatively exist to serve the needs of the citizenry, throwing itself a party and coercing (or encouraging, if one prefers such rhetorical distinctions) our youth to join in the fun, isn't nearly as worthwhile as a government earning the appreciation of its citizens, who then show spontaneous appreciation for the good it does.
But that would require the government to worry less about how to get the public to become obedient patriots, making the job of people who were once called public servants but now call themselves our Leaders far more difficult and much less satisfying. Civic virtue is a wonderful thing. Just not theirs.
© 2012 Simple Justice NY LLC. This feed is for personal, non-commercial & Newstex use only. The use of this feed on any other website is a copyright violation. If this feed is not via RSS reader or Newstex, it infringes the copyright.
Source: http://blog.simplejustice.us/2013/02/27/civic-virtue-teach-your-children-well.aspx?ref=rss
divorce lawers divorce lawyer divorce lawyers download power of attorney dui attorney
No comments:
Post a Comment